Why Copyrights Would Kill The Fashion Industry
from the how-it-all-works dept
Earlier this month, we wrote about Senator Chuck Schumer's misguided plan to extend copyright protection to the fashion industry. As we've noted in the past, this makes absolutely no sense. The purpose of copyright is to create incentives for new creative content -- but the fashion industry already has those incentives. It's already quite competitive with designers constantly coming up with new designs. In other words, there's no reason to add artificial incentives for creativity. In fact, recent research suggested that the entire reason that the fashion industry is as successful as it has been is because of the lack of copyright for fashion designs. David Levine now points us to another analysis, suggesting how adding copyrights to fashion designs could kill the fashion industry, by killing the biggest thing that helps the industry thrive: trends."People don't buy new clothes because they need them--they buy them to keep up with the latest style. The fashion industry responds to our desires by churning out new designs at a rapid clip. But fashion designers don't maroon themselves on a desert island to create their work. Designers pay close attention to the work of their peers, and they love to mine the past for ideas. When they see something that they like, they copy it--or, in the argot of the industry, they "reference" it.... The result is the fashion industry's most sacred concept: the trend. Copying makes trends, and trends are what sell fashion.... And the trend-driven copying of attractive designs ensures that those designs diffuse rapidly in the marketplace. This, in turn, makes the early adopters want a new style, because nothing is less attractive than seeing your carefully chosen clothes on the backs of the hoi polloi. In short, copying is the engine that drives the fashion cycle."The article goes on to discuss exactly how Schumer's bill would kill this process. The article also, strangely, insists that the reasons why copyright would hurt the fashion industry don't apply to other industries, despite little proof of that fact. The fashion industry shows how little artificial monopolies are needed when you have plenty of other market incentives for compensating creators. That can apply just as well to many different industries.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: chuck schumer, copyright, fashion industry
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Yay
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sorry if you want a new pair you can only bet them from Tommy Hillfigure (Not sure how that is spelled, i do not wear billboards so never owned any) they own the rights to them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Talk about overreacting. And you take the MPAA, RIAA and others for hyping problems? Pot, meet kettle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Congress can't stop meddling
I literally couldn't care less about the fashion industry either, but I has seen time and time again that everything Congress touches gets broken. That body of crooks couldn't find ugly on an outhouse rat without spending 20 billion dollars and putting a million people out of work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That would be great
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: That would be great
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: That would be great
I wonder who has the copyright on pantaloons?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's never going to happen
Apparently these legislators never read Cheney Bros. v. Doris Silk Corp in law school (35 F.2d 279 (2d. Cir. 1929)). That should be required reading for any politician that wants to legislate intellectual property.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's never going to happen
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's never going to happen
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pathetic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
however, it does not apply well to technological industries for a few reasons. first, copying something electronically costs essentially zero. disk space, wow. second, there are a lot more technological developers than "fashion developers".
it will always cost something to produce a shirt, and so few people can make a shirt, so you can't just go and copy a design as easily as with digital media.
for anyone who thinks this is a good thing. whatever. i like wearing good looking things.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
People "steal" old music all the time, and the only writer credit they get is being the song's arranger. Also if someone has a specific sleeve copyrighted then it will be like sampling that sleeve.
I mean I think that it could being more competition to fashion or could totally screw everything up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
but it would be dangerous if they don't keep it "thin" so it doesn't harm creativity so much.
And its not necessarily "harder" to pinpoint copying in fashion. fashion designers may know how to pinpoint those things in their own standards as much as musicians and playwrights do in theirs. it wouldn't be accurate to say so unless you were an expert in the field.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Techdirt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
T-shirts and jeans
Don't think that because you think it's not fashion that it isn't. You buy shirts that have been designed. Patterns are constantly being revised fabrics tested and screen printing techniques refined to create what you are deeming to be just a t-shirt. In denim the same thing is always happening. Dying techniques are modified to give your "just jeans" that worn in look as well as washing techniques to make them feel more worn in. If such things were copy-written then you might start seeing less innovative refinements in the basics that we all enjoy today.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
trademark fashion
Trademark laws as pertaining to fashion sounds strange since design has always been left up to interpretation good example is the little black dress, how many times have we seen the re-birth of that design?
Where will the line be drawn since it is after all competition that drives creativity in the fashion industry.
Guess we will have to see who this law will benefit...
the designers or the consumers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
trademark fashion
Trademark laws as pertaining to fashion sounds strange since design has always been left up to interpretation good example is the little black dress, how many times have we seen the re-birth of that design?
Where will the line be drawn since it is after all competition that drives creativity in the fashion industry.
Guess we will have to wait and see who this law will benefit...
the designers or the consumers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sketching in a store
how come I can take notes in a library book to help me with my paper or lecture to remember or contradict later, I can sketch in a meuseum, I can sketch buildings and interiors of places which actually do have a drawing saying that design belongs to an architect. not only was the guy rude, and patronizing the
whole civil rights issue on sketching in a public place being violated has really made me convinced about the degradation of our society as a money hungry monster, with no regard what so ever for creativity. i was basicaly treated like a criminal and I am not.
I feel i should take action but any sugestion?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe Women can Save Money!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]